Friday, April 17, 2015

I remember the time that a favourite client of mine gave me
a schooling in the art of legal writing – and proofreading.

A retired lawyer (and the consummate gentleman), he had
retained me to draft revisions to a fairly complex Last Will and Testament.

He was a bit of a stickler. And I’m fortunate to have had
the opportunity to have worked with him. Because even though my content was
fine, he still had lots to say about the way my draft was set up.

Here, in a nutshell, is what I learned from him.

Precision and consistency in style, capitalization and
formatting can be at least as important as content in the creation of legal
documentation that meets the standards of our profession.

In other words:

Consistent
Capitals, Please: If you are capitalizing Executor in one
paragraph, you need to capitalize that word everywhere in the document.
This holds true in pleadings as well. If Respondent reappears in your
document, be consistent in whether you capitalize it;

Don’t
mix and match your semicolons and periods: If you are working on
a list, use semicolons throughout, except for the last paragraph of your
list, which should end with a period;

Don’t
mess with gender: “His/her” is probably never appropriate in a
legal document, and certainly is not appropriate when dealing with a
single person. Take the time to verify that your gender descriptions fit
your document – especially when you are working from templates and
precedents;

Paragraph
numbering: To avoid errors in paragraph numbering, especially
when editing, always use automatic formatting for paragraphs and lists;

Proofread
once, twice and then proofread again. The same goes for spell
checking – this should be done after every revision;

Use
section titles: These will make your document easier to
read. Once again, consistency matters. If you are using titles, decide
whether you will be underlining them, using bold font, or both, and stick
to that same selection throughout your document;

Revisit
your draft. Where possible, after you have finished your document, put
it away for a few hours or a day before sending it out. Come back to it
later to do a final check. You could be surprised at the number of obvious
errors – in content and style – you may find when you have fresh eyes available.

Yes, it really does matter that you get it right.

As a lawyer, you are among other things, a professional writer.
Your work product is your calling card, and it will go a long way, particularly
when you’re starting out, toward establishing how your clients and colleagues
assess you.

(As well, your supervising lawyer will probably not
appreciate being called upon repeatedly to edit sloppiness, spelling mistakes,
typos, formatting errors, and grammatical problems you could have found
yourself in your draft).

So that’s a wrap on this week’s tip: Take the time to
get your writing right. It will make a difference.

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has ordered National Money Mart Company to pay $30,000 in compensation to a former, one-year employee of the company who had been subjected to ongoing, serious sexual harassment by her workplace supervisor.

With the Ontario Court of Appeal's June 25, 2009 ruling in Slepenkova v. Ivanov, it is now clear that the nearly-universal pronouncements by management lawyers as to the death of Wallace damages after Honda and Keays may have been a bit premature.

In Slepenkova, the Ontario appellate court upheld a two-month notice extension for an employer's bad faith termination, even though no evidence was led at trial as to the specific damages the employee directly incurred as a result of the bad faith. This appeared to place the trial Judge's decision at odds with the new Wallace test set out in Honda.

About WISE LAW BLOG

Wise Law Blogfeatures timely articles on legal developments in Canada and the United States, along with commentary on Canadian politics, American politics, technology and noteworthy current affairs.

Launched on April 5, 2005, Wise Law Blog also highlights key decisions of Canadian courts, with focus on Ontario Family Law, Ontario Employment Law and other areas of interest.

Garry J. Wise is primary contributor to Wise Law Blog. He is a Canadian litigation lawyer who practices with Wise Law Office,Toronto. He is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School and was called to the Ontario Bar in 1986.

Garry's colleagues at Wise Law Office, as well as occasional guest bloggers, also contribute to Wise Law Blog.

Follow Us:

Follow by Email

Terms of Use

The articles and comments on Wise Law Blog are intended to provide general information on current issues and developments in the law. They are not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should not rely upon or act on information in this, or any blog without seeking legal advice as to the matters of specific concern to them. No solicitor and client relationship is created or can be created by accessing, reading or commenting upon any post at this site.

Wise Law Blog is not responsible for and does not necessarily agree with the contents of comments posted by readers of this blog. Such comments represent the personal views of the commenters only, and are included on this blog in the interest of promoting public discourse and a free exchange of ideas. We reserve the right to decline or delete any comment posted on this site which we, in our sole and absolute discretion, deem inappropriate for publication on this site.

CBC | Top Stories

CBC | Canadian News

CBC | Technology & Science News

MSNBC.com: Top MSNBC Headlines

BBC News | News Front Page | World Edition

Wise Law Blog, (c)2005-2010 Garry J. Wise and Wise Law Office, Toronto. All rights are reserved. Permission for reproduction and/or republication of any portion of this publication for solely non-commercial purposes is hereby granted provided any such non-commercial use shall include: (a) credit to the original author(s) thereof; (b) printable, embedded hyperlink to original Wise Law Blog post url. Reproduction and republication of any portion of this publication for commercial purposes is expressly prohibited without the permission in writing of the author(s).